searching in new versions

[cyndersk]

Up until the last two updates I was able to search in my library by just typing part of the authors name, or part of the title name in the search box - it would then filter for anything that matched what I had entered.

With the past two updates when I use just the search box and type it in, nothing happens - I have had to resort to using the advanced search feature - which I find a pain in the you know what.

Was this change deliberate or did I change some setting accidentally, or is it a bug?



Thanks,
Cindy

[theducks]

Originally Posted by cyndersk

Up until the last two updates I was able to search in my library by just typing part of the authors name, or part of the title name in the search box - it would then filter for anything that matched what I had entered.

With the past two updates when I use just the search box and type it in, nothing happens - I have had to resort to using the advanced search feature - which I find a pain in the you know what.

Was this change deliberate or did I change some setting accidentally, or is it a bug?



Thanks,
Cindy

Works for me Windows and Linux
Do you have the Highlight button clicked (straight blue bars with no red slash)?

[kovidgoyal]

press enter or click the go button after you finish typinghh

[cyndersk]

That is how it worked before the updates. I've attached screen shots so you can see what I mean.

I'm very puzzled.....

[kovidgoyal]

try unchecking limit searched metadata in the search preferences

[chaley]

Take 'rating' out of preferences->search->limit ("columns that searches are limited to"). The problem is that it is illegal to search for rating:balducci, because balducci is not a number.

[cyndersk]

THANKS!!! taking the rating out of the search limits worked!!! Happy once again :-)

[theducks]

Originally Posted by chaley

Take 'rating' out of preferences->search->limit ("columns that searches are limited to"). The problem is that it is illegal to search for rating:balducci, because balducci is not a number.

Isn't that a bug?
Search Strings that are inappropriate for a field should simply bypass that field.
If I search for "10"
That could be a (legacy) rating or a title (There was a movie with that name)

[chaley]

Originally Posted by theducks

Isn't that a bug?
Search Strings that are inappropriate for a field should simply bypass that field.
If I search for "10"
That could be a (legacy) rating or a title (There was a movie with that name)

Both agree and disagree.

Typing rating:aaa should be an error, coloring the search bar pink. Same should be true for #somebool:hithere (which I haven't fixed yet).

However, in indirect searches like setting the limit_search, such errors should be ignored. That change is already committed in trunk.

[theducks]

Originally Posted by chaley

Both agree and disagree.

Typing rating:aaa should be an error, coloring the search bar pink. Same should be true for #somebool:hithere (which I haven't fixed yet).

However, in indirect searches like setting the limit_search, such errors should be ignored. That change is already committed in trunk.

I think we agree.

If I do a explicit search with a wrong type, I should get smacked with a error.
If I do a global or 'Limited' global, it needs to not fail just because there was a numeric field and an Alpha search string.